Evaluating the Impact of Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

data sets (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). A mixture of quantitative and qualitative
data was collected, including: OfSTED evidence; documentary evidence;
teachers’ and other practitioner evidence.
The interview phase data was analysed using both N-VIVO Nudist software
and Microsoft Word, allowing researchers to identify key and recurrent
themes, to group responses and to clarify emergent themes.
The rationale for selecting this approach stems from a view, well supported in
the research literature, that cases are a powerful means of understanding
complexity; sharing knowledge about processes, practices and outcomes;
and understanding the relevance of local context (Robson 1993; Shkedi 1998;
Wengraf 2001). This approach gave robustness to the study; providing an
effective means of capturing the diverse experiences and perceptions of all
those involved and yielded rich data. In addition, a wide range of
documentary evidence of practice was collected at each school involved in
the interview phase. Emphasis is placed below on calibrating the perceptions
of teachers, pupils, headteachers and key stakeholders in the schools with
the wider survey data; for this reason, the results of the interview phase are
presented thematically.
All interviews were recorded and 25% were transcribed. Transcripts were
analysed using continent and cross-theme analysis. Through methodological
and respondent triangulation, the data provided authentic and robust portraits
of the CPD experience among teachers of different subjects, phases, age
ranges, career phases, and in different contexts. The interviews led to the
development of categories and typologies and comparative analyses so that,
‘instances are compared across a range of situations, over time, among a
number of people and through a variety of methods’ (Woods, 1996, p.81).
Data collection during the interviews took the form of both recording and
written field-notes.
- 21 -